Research Korner: Education Special

Literature Review

This chapter   will provide the discussion of relevant literature concerning the issues on parents’ perspective about special education provision. Special Education is known to be an educational alternative which gives attention on the teaching of students having academic, health, physical or behavioural needs that cannot sufficiently be met utilising traditional or conventional educational programs or approaches. Special education has been recognised by many as an important development of education since it provides adequate a suitable educational approach to meet the needs of the so-called special children (Stough & Palmer, 2004). The independent variables of interest have ranged from the curriculum and methods to the competencies, or preparation, of teachers and the location of the service. The dependent variables have also varied widely and included academic achievement and behavior. Notwithstanding significant gains in developing a knowledge base of empirically validated practices, measurement problems, and, because of ethical issues, constraints on implementing experimental designs have kept the issues of “best practices” a much debated topic. Special education has become increasingly complex over the past thirty years. Schools have become more diverse, parents have become more involved, accountability for the academic gains of students has increased, and the philosophy of service delivery has become a larger policy issue.   Parents Perspective on Special Education             As mentioned, the context of special education has encountered different issues in the perspective of the parents. If there are people who would become more conscious about the special education provisions, this would be the parents of the children.  Parents avail the services of special education to ensure that their children will be able to adjust in the environment and to ensure that adequate or enough knowledge are being provided.  With these, parents become more critical on identifying different issues concerning the quality of services given in a special education.  There are many issues that parents need to be certain for the sake of their children. Such issues will be discussed below. In the study conducted by the NYS Commission on Quality Care (1990), they concluded that parental satisfaction about their child’s education program depends greatly on the type of disability and the needs of the children. About 75% of parents of students with physical disabilities were satisfied on the service while 57% of parents of children with learning disabilities indicated with children’s programs. In this study, the most typical parental concerns affecting satisfaction includes lack of personal attention/education; inadequate teacher training, and inadequate time spent by handicapped children with non-handicapped children.             One of the issues concerning this is the lack of fully certified and adequately trained special education instructors or teachers, which has been regarded as severe and pervasive, affects the quality of education services that special students receive.  Over the years, researchers have conducted a study to investigate the magnitude of the shortage issue for certified and efficient special educational teachers and the factors that can be attributed to this case.             A number of proposals touched on the issues relevant to the training of teachers to teach students having special needs, sometimes in the concept of determining units of study which should be included in teacher training courses. Such perspective expressed that the extent in which the teacher training courses prepared the trainees to know the whole idea of teaching students with special needs and determine the respond appropriate with these students are insufficient.             In this manner, the need for enhanced teacher training arises from the restrictions of many current teacher training programs.  In a study conducted by Trump and Hange (1996), 48 American private and public instructions of higher education teachers were surveyed to identify the extent in which pre-service general training teachers has been able to received instruction or trainings relevant to inclusion of students with special needs. The survey shows that many of these institutions had failed in preparing regular educators for the challenges of inclusion and joint teaching environments. In a similar study conducted in rural British Columbia, it was concluded that both the in-service and pre-service education had insufficiently prepared the teachers for the realities of having students with special needs (Bandy & Boyer, 1994). The inclusion of students with significant disabilities in the state and local standards-based education reform initiatives is good in improving the current practices within the entire education system and in rectifying the problem about the exclusion of students with disabilities. However, to attain a unified system of educational accountability, legislators and policymakers must have full recognition on the individual and intensive needs of children with significant disabilities; and resolve the problems associated with alternate assessment. This consideration will also make the parents become more satisfied with what their children received in special education services (Glass, 2004).             Aside from the inadequate training, lack of resources and support is also one of the issues perceived by the parents to the current special education provision. The parents are seeking the help of special education services because they think that the government has enough funding to meet the needs of their children. However, some institutions do not have adequate funding support the needs of the special education services and the special needs of the children.  With this the satisfaction of the parents are being affected. Other issues perceived by the parents and other critics of special education are the issue of inclusion at secondary level. Inclusive classrooms are one of the ways in which educational interventions are delivered to students with special needs in Europe. European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education (2003) stated that behaviour; social and/or emotional problems are biggest challenge within the area of inclusion of pupils with special education needs. Furthermore, character approach to students with Special Educational Needs is rejected in favour of a more environment-interactive approach to SEN. Furthermore, handling diversity is the key issue at the classroom level. When dealing with differences in the classroom, class teachers need an extra pair of hands or extra support from either colleagues (or special education teachers) or other professionals. Basically, it leads to the challenges of co-teaching (classroom level), team teaching and the need for good co-operation between teachers, on the school level and co-ordination with professionals from other support services (EADSNE, 2003). However, with lack of classroom management and comprehensive instructions offered by some of the institutions offering special education services, the parents are concerned that this will cause a bigger conflict. Another issue to be given emphasis is maltreatment of teachers towards children with special needs of with disabilities (Sobsey, 2002). Sometimes, because of lack of training and preparation in handling students with special needs, most teachers could not be able to do their job effectively. Oftentimes, the teachers are abusing children with disabilities physically, verbally, emotionally and psychologically. These abuses affect both parents and children and may have a tendency that the parents will not allow their children to avail special education services. Further, social integration or is also an issue for parents. Social integration issue refers to the lack of time spent by disabled children with other peers. As it was observed by parents, simply placing children in the same classroom or moving a child from institution to home did not ensure positive interactions between handicapped children and their peers (Allen, Benning, Drummond, 1972; Devoney, Guralnick, & Rubin, 1974). Neither did social integration, in itself, foster the goals of cognitive and social growth on the part of the disabled children (Guralnick, 1978). Hence, for parents, if this will continue, the purpose of bringing their child to a special education institution will not be met. In this manner, curricular or programmatic approaches to fostering social integration include, most importantly, a careful choice of the context or activities in which integration occurs. Involving a small number of disabled and non-disabled children in special projects or recreational activities such as planning a carnival or playing on a bowling team is one effective strategy for fostering social interaction and positive attitudes of non-handicapped children toward disabled peers (Aloia, Beaver, & Pettus, 1978; Chennault, 1967; Johnson et al, 1983; Rucker & Vincenzo, 1970; Stainbeck, Stainbeck, & Jaben, 1981). The development of such activities for use with severely handicapped and non-handicapped students is described by Brown and his colleague (1979). An alternative approach is to design activities in which non- handicapped children are given a special invitation to become involved in activities with handicapped children in the capacity of teacher helpers (McHale, 1983; Poorman, 1980). Other programmatic considerations for fostering social integration include the nature of the classroom's physical layout and equipment (Hoben, 1980), and encouragement and reinforcement by adults (Guralnick, 1978; Hoben, 1980).             Another problem is with regards to curriculum standardisation. The promotion of curriculum standardization is a crucial component to the current education reform movement. This point of view presents problems. According to McIntyre, highlighting curriculum standardisation creates problem for special education because it hampers individualization in special classes (Glass, 2004). This will also affect the satisfaction of parents of those special children. For the parents, there is a tendency that their children would not be able to cope with such standardisation. Ysseldyke et al. (1994) also stresses that the successful participation of students with cognitive disabilities depends on states developing outcomes, which are wide-ranging and broad enough to be significant for the students. Furthermore, McDonnell, et al. (1997) believes that enough attention should be given to the specific curricular needs of students with cognitive disabilities. The successful participation of students with disabilities in the standards-based reform is determined based on the degree to which a set of content standards is appropriate to their valued educational outcomes and consistent with proven instructional practices.   Conclusion Children’s education is practically made by parents using the viability and the quality of life as their basis. They send their kids to normal schools where boards and books are normal. They are expected to retain their everyday learning for progress. However, children with special education needs might receive very little education on classrooms and ordinary schools and might always be excluded from the class (Armstrong, 2004, p.39). Accordingly, every school that offers special education must have an Individualized Education Program (IEP). The said program involves parents, teachers and must have its own faculty staff to verify students’ unique needs. IEP is formulated for parents and teachers to discover the educational results and abilities of the child. In addition, the issues mentioned above should be given enough attention and provide effective solution so as to ensure that children with special needs as well as their parents will be satisfied for the special education services.   Reference Allen K., Benning, P. and Drummond, T. (1972). "Integration of normal and handicapped children in a behavior modification preschool: A case study." In Behavioural Analysis and Education, edited by G. Semb. Lawrence , KS: University of Kansas Press.   Aloia, G., Beaver, R., and Pettus, W. (1978). "Increasing initial interactions among integrated EMR students and their nonretarded peers in a game-playing situation." American Journal of Mental Deficiency 82: 573-579.   Armstrong, D.  (2004).  Experiences of Special Education: Re-Evaluating Policy and Practice through Life Stories. New York: Routledge Falmer.   Bandy, H. E. & Boyer, W. A. R. (1994). The impact of special needs students on teachers in the rural areas of British Columbia. In D. McSwan & M. McShane (Eds.), An international conference on issues affecting rural communities: Proceedings of the conference held by the Rural Education Research and Development Centre at Sheraton Breakwater Casino-Hotel, Townsville Queensland Australia, 10-15 July 1994 (pp. 232-241). Townsville: James Cook University of North Queensland, Rural Education Research and Development Centre.   Brown L.; Branston M.; Baumgart D.; Vincent L.; Falvey M.; and Schroeder J. (1979). "Utilizing characteristics of a variety of current and subsequent least restrictive environments as factors in the development of curricular content for severely handicapped students." American Association for the Severely Profoundly Handicapped Review 4:407-424.   Chennault ,G. (1967). "Improving the social acceptance of unpopular mentally retarded pupils in special classes. American Journal of Mental Deficiency 72:455-458.   Devoney C. Guralnick, M. and Rubin, H. (1974). "Integrating handicapped and nonhandicapped preschool children: Effects on social play." Childhood Education 50:360-364.   European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education (2003). Key Principles for Special Needs Education: Recommendation for Policy Makers. Brussels, Belgium   Glass, G. V. (2004). Education Policy Analysis Archives. Arizona: Arizona     State   University, College of Education, vol. 12, no. 16.   Guralnick, M. (1978). "Integrated preschools as educational and therapeutic environments: Concepts, design, and analyses." In Early Interventionand the Integration of Handicapped and Nonhandicapped Children and the Integration of Handicapped and Nonhandicapped Children, edited by M. Guralnick. Baltimore, MD, University Park Press.   Hoben M. (1980):  "Toward integration in the mainstream." Exceptional Children 47 :100-105   Johnson, R., Johnson, D., DeWeerdt, N., Lyons, V., and Zaidman, B. (1983). "Integrating social adaptively handicapped seventh grade students into constructive relationships with nonhandicapped peers in science class." American Journal of Mental Deficiency 6: 611-618.   McDonnell, L. et al. (1997). Educating one and all. Washington, D.C.: National         Academy Press.   McHale S. (1983). "Social interactions of autistic and nonhandicapped children during free play." American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 53: 8191.   NYS Commission on Quality of Care (1990).  Special Education in New York State: Parents' Perspective. Available at [http://www.cqc.state.ny.us/publications/pubsped.htm]. Accessed on [31/03/06].   Poorman C. (1980). "Mainstreaming in reverse with a special friend." Teaching Exceptional Children 12: 136-142.   Rucker C., and Vincenzo F. (1970). "Mainstreaming social acceptance gains made by mentally retarded children." Exceptional Children 36: 679-680.   Sobsey, D. (2002). Exceptionality, Education and Maltreatment. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc, 10(1): 29-46.   Stainbeck W.; Stainbeck T.; and Jaben T. (1981) "Providing opportunities for interaction between severely handicapped and nonhandicapped students. Teaching Exceptional Children 13: 72-75.   Stough, L.M. (2004). Special Thinking in Special Settings: A Qualitative Study of Expert Special Educators. Journal of Special education.   Trump, G. C., & Hange, J. E. (1996). Concerns about and Effective Strategies for Inclusion: Focus Group Interview Findings from West Virginia Teachers. Charleston, West Virginia: Appalachia Educational Laboratory.   Yseldyke, et al. (1994). Educational accountability for students with      disabilities. Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota, National     Center on Educational Outcomes.

Literature Review

This chapter will provide the discussion of relevant literature concerning the issues on parents’ perspective about special...

SPECIAL EDUCATION

Literature review: Issues arising from parents’ perspective Regarding special service provisions.   Introduction             The reason why there is a Parents-Teachers Associations among all schools is to meet the children’s growth and education. The parents, who play an important part in the lives of their children, are considered to be the first educators, since it is at home where children mostly reside. The teachers, considered to be the second parents, are the ones taking over the role of the parent and somehow get the larger responsibility to shape the children’s academic aspect. And it is in the collaboration of responsibilities of the parents and teachers that the education of the children is more effectively developed.             Unfortunately, the parents are often underemphasized in the component of educational decision-making. Long years of observation have convinced hat the role of many parents in the child's educational development has been minimal. That is to say parents have been content, generally, to put the responsibility for this development entirely in the hands of the school. For example, the matter of discipline, especially in recent years, has fallen to the teachers and the principal often with little or no help from parents ( 6/14/1997).  And true enough, generally, parents are comfortably secured enough that while they send their kids in the school they think all is well. Such negligence has led to numerous problems for the school. It is difficult, for instance, for teachers to hold the attention of students in the classroom when there are disruptive students present. Parents have not taught them to respect fellow students, teachers, and themselves and have not emphasized the importance of an education in today's society. As a result, some students not only are inattentive but also are doing things that divert the attention of those who desire to learn ( 6/14/1997). Education and Special Education             Education is defined to be any process, either formal or informal, that shapes the potential of a maturing organism. Informal education results from the constant effect of environment and its strength in shaping values and habits can not be overestimated. Formal education is a conscious effort by human society to impart the skills and modes of thought considered essential for social functioning ( 2004).             Today, education is effectively translated to academic institutions. Young people are molded through schools with different degrees.             On the other hand, the term "inclusion" refers to a process whereby students with disabilities receive their education, with necessary special education support, primarily in general classrooms alongside students without special education designations (, 1992). Further on, the term "inclusion" is more philosophically loaded, prescribing that the appropriate placement for students with disabilities is almost always the general classroom. This means that they are to be considered as full-fledged members of, not visitors to, the general classroom and are to be educated in that setting to the fullest extent possible with necessary supports. Occasional removal from the general classroom, while not ruled out, requires justification in terms of practicality or feasibility considerations ( 1996). A study conducted by  (2000) states that the new millennium faces new roles and new opportunities (such as schools becoming more diverse, diversified collaboration, increase in accountability for the academic gains of students, and the philosophy of service delivery becoming a larger purposeful issue for all involved parties) to continue and better the needs of learners who may be marginalised by any existing educational arrangements (, 2000).  In Australia, much of the debate lies to change the set curriculum and the segregated approach still existing in some special needs schools especially for severe learning difficulties (SLD) and profound and multiple learning disabilities (PMLD) ( 2002). Indeed, special education is an important development of education.    Parents Perspective on Special Education It’s every parent’s dream to have their disabled child to live normally. Thus Special Education is the proper leeway to have these kids to live and go to school normally like any other kids. These parents hope that availing the services of special education would make certain that their children will have an environment that would not remind them they are different, but an environment that teaches them to face the fact and move forward. Also there will be quite a strong and adequate knowledge being provided. After all, the point of having people go to school is to prepare them to grow and face the real world. What, then, would be the real world of these disabled children but a world we are living now. An examination of three dimensions of perceptions assessed found that parents were more positive regarding the impact of inclusion on mutual social benefits, acceptance, and treatment of their child and more apprehensive regarding the impact of inclusion on the quality of educational services their child receives. Discussion includes how these findings may offer insight into reasoning used by some parents when considering the benefits of more inclusive educational placements for their own children  (1998)). One reason why parents support for inclusion is because of the chance for improvement in the included child's social skills, the benefits of having their child attend a neighborhood school, and the view that classrooms should not be segregated, but rather be representative of the larger society. However, parents are concerned of their children for some other reasons. Parents see adequate teacher preparation as one of the most important components for a special needs child to successfully integrate in an inclusive programme. Studies have shown that these parents feel the self-esteem of their children is negatively affected. These parents sometimes think general educators lacked understanding of learning disabilities (, 1990; , 1989). Moreover, another study examining the perceptions of parents of children with abilities ranging from gifted/talented to regular with learning problems indicated that parents feel inclusion is detrimental in meeting the needs of all students (, 1995). Most parental concerns focus around the following: 1) gifted students are bored and unchallenged; 2) average children receive a "watered" down curriculum and resent adaptations made for students with disabilities; 3) regular students are frustrated by seeing other children doing less work and receiving the same or better grades; and 4) teachers spend "too much time" on disciplining and managing students with behavior problems or working with slower students (, 1995). Finally, a national study on inclusion states that "some general education parents report the positive social and academic benefits for their children due to involvement with persons with disabilities and the increase in instructional supports in the classroom" ( 1995, page 5). Another factor why people are hesitant about inclusive school is because of lack of resources. Lack of resources is also a major concern to parents from special education provision.  According to  (2003) parents worry about lack of appropriate support and resources for their specialist children. Many parents believe that when there is a lack of support, teachers have to share their attention between few students with severe disabilities.  Moreover, findings reveal that there is a shortage of special education professionals with the expertise required to work with special needs children, insufficient funds to develop and support programmes to provide specialist students requiring assistance and lack of resources to adequately accommodate special children.  While these findings are based primarily on studies from America and Europe, it can also be linked to Australia where much is required to successfully deliver all aspects of special education programs.   Furthermore, parents believe that curricular emphasis found in programs for students with severe disabilities has historically shifted from remedial academic instruction and functional life skill development to the development of friendships or social skills between people with disabilities and their able peers (, 2002; , 1992), and that those who advocate for the placement of all students into general education classrooms often view such social goals as their primary concern ( 1994). On the other hand, social integration is an issue for parents. Social integration issue refers to the lack of time spent by disabled children with other peers.  Parents observed this by simply placing children in the same - it did not ensure positive interactions between disabled children and their peers (, 2001; , 2001). Neither did social integration, in itself, foster the goals of cognitive and social growth on the part of the disabled children (, 2001). Hence, it can be said that for parents, if this will continue, the purpose of bringing their child to a special education institution will not be met.  Furthermore, handling diversity is the key issue at the classroom level. When dealing with differences in the classroom, class teachers need an extra pair of hands or extra support from either colleagues (or special education teachers) or other professionals ( 2003; , 2002).  Basically, it leads to the challenges of co-teaching (classroom level), team teaching and the need for good co-operation between teachers, on the school level and co-ordination with professionals from other support services (, 2003). Program of study   The promotion of curriculum standardization is a crucial component to the current education reform movement.  (2002) states that a more desirable school curriculum accommodating special needs children is required in Australia.  According to (2004) a more standardised curriculum can create problem for special education by hampering individualization in special classes.  Furthermore, it can also affect the satisfaction of parents of those special children. For the parents, there is a tendency that their children would not be able to cope with such standardisation.  (1994) also stressed that the successful participation of students with cognitive disabilities depends on states developing outcomes, which are wide-ranging and broad enough to be significant for the students. Furthermore, (1997) affirm that enough attention should be given to the specific curricular needs of students with disabilities. However, it should be noted that a successful participation of students with disabilities in the standards-based reform is determined based on the degree to which a set of content standards is appropriate to their valued educational outcomes and consistent with proven instructional practices.  (2001) found that parents are sceptical when it comes to secondary level inclusions.  Furthermore, it was revealed that many parents believe there is heavy emphasis on content knowledge.  For example to complete high school successfully, students must master a wide variety of content areas.  Many students with disabilities find mastering such a wide domain of content knowledge daunting and overwhelming.  To complicate the situation, many special education teachers are not experts in many of these content domains, which may limit their ability to facilitate student learning (, 2000;  1996;  1997).  Clearly, the complexities of secondary education interact with effective special education in a variety of ways, which are at present not fully stipulated (, 2000b).  While most classroom adaptations comes under the theme of understanding the learning needs of student with disabilities, the special educator’s expertise can be most critical in this area.  Learning Disabilities Association of British Columbia Parental Concerns (2002) conducted a survey in Canada asking three hundred and fifty parents to indicate their general satisfaction with the public schools program of study and if it was meeting their child’s needs, only 3% indicated the program fully met their needs.  A full 61% felt the system poorly met or failed their child’s needs.  A little more than a third (36%) felt that school adequately met their child’s needs.  A full 77% of parents indicated that they had expressed concern about their child’s lack of progress, lack of services, and/or IEP in the past.   Over half had expressed these concerns to principals or Vice-Principals.  Less than half (47%) were satisfied with the results. Of the 53% who were not satisfied, a full 89% of them were not informed of their right to appeal.  When asked if they had ever filed an appeal only 1% indicated they had.  38% stated they did not know about them, while 19% stated they felt an appeal would not change the outcome or that there would be negative consequences for their child.  The parents believe that the funding provided by the government is woefully inadequate to provide children with special needs the appropriate services they require.  Furthermore, the parents perceive that despite policies, the current system does not address this population's needs. Parents are very dissatisfied with current services, lack of available assessment, lack of appropriate programs, and lack of support, poor teacher knowledge and preparedness, and response to their concerns. As discussed in the report there are many reasons for the above; however, the survey describes the general decline in services to this neglected population in public school system.  The above findings affirm that there is a presence of considerable variability in parents view toward inclusive programmes service delivery.  The multidimensionality of parent attitudes toward inclusive practices reveals the subjective and phenomenological nature of the reasoning process a parent undergoes when considering educational placement options.  While interpreting various readings to write this literature, I have identified that parents can be expected to have varying views regarding inclusive placement options based on a broad range of interacting variables rather than on a singular determinant, such as the cognitive profile of their child. As such, if schools are to meet the challenge of educating increased numbers of children with diverse needs, teachers must be well trained and must embrace instruction and curricula that engage and encourage all students.  The importance should be placed on several interrelated educational strategies: heterogeneous student grouping; developmentally appropriate practice; an inclusive curriculum that emphasizes children's strengths yet accommodates their needs; high expectations for all students; appropriate physical environment and materials; collaboration and instructional teaming with other teachers and professionals; support from administrators, families, and the community, and above all ongoing professional development (, 2002);  , 2001;   1994; , 1994). Future Research This paper is primarily linked to studies undertaken in America and Europe with some findings from Australian perspective.  To accurately analyse what Australian parents perspective are regarding the service provision in the inclusive setting, it would be beneficial to carry out more studies that looks at various aspects of service delivery (teacher training, resource support, technical support etc) in Australia. Such studies will enable educators and other professional agencies to obtain a much broader aspect of what is been warranted and act accordingly.  Furthermore, it is recommended more longitudinal studies that consider both the short and long-term effects of different models of service delivery be undertaken from Australian perspective.  This will provide parents and educators with important information when considering the most appropriate program for a particular child and perhaps transform their (parent and/or educator) concerns positively. Counterclaims Among other claims that refute inclusive school for disabled students are the teacher’s perceptions’ that students who are in handicap should be placed in a special school. As any teacher knows, students with disabilities are labeled and removed from the general education classroom because, after the best efforts of the classroom teacher, the needs of the student are not being met. To return the student to the same classroom, under the same circumstances (e.g., same level of teacher support), is irresponsible and will not lead to a good instructional program for the student. Indeed, unless major changes occur in general education classrooms and schools, the likelihood is strong that students with disabilities who are placed back into these settings will not receive significant benefits ( (1996)). Many teachers would say that disabled kids should be placed in a segregated school in order for them to dwell on the same setting with other kids. These kids might not be able to catch up with other kids. One of the criticisms of inclusion in many schools is that too much is being made of the needs of one small group of students. We agree with this statement if inclusion benefits only students with disabilities ( (1996)). Conclusion The inclusion programs help these disabled children to live in the normal environment, wherein they co-exist with children who have normal conditions. The positive effect on this is that these “gifted” children are nourished to live the real society of which they will grow up with. They will be taught how to carry on themselves given this imperfect world, so when they grow up they would face the world head on. However, other claims that having these children are part of the inclusion could also mean other disadvantages like keeping up with the class and exemptions. A child having mental capacity problem might not be able to keep with the class pace. A child having physical disorder could not be part of physical education class. Parent perceptions of inclusive practices may be largely a function of the value placed on particular curricular skills and beliefs regarding where those skills can best be nurtured.  As such, it is vital that education professionals understand the perspectives of the parents of the children whom they serve (, 2000a).  Moreover, the success of inclusion lies on the sacrifices among the parents, the children, and the teachers. The road to success may be paved with challenges, but it through understanding, open communication, effective intervention practices, and service delivery that meet the needs of the child.  Education professionals and parents have a common goal – the best possible education for these children as such the educators, professional agencies and parents need to work collaboratively.  Furthermore, the process of attaining a goal is greatly enhanced when all involved in determining a child inclusive programme to understand each other’s perspectives.  No doubt, these changes are unlikely to happen without a substantial commitment of time, effort and money from all those concerned.  References

SPECIAL EDUCATION

Literature review: Issues arising from parents’ perspective Regarding special service provisions. Introduction The r...

Top